8 Dec
2004
8 Dec
'04
2:01 p.m.
I think all your points are wrong:
1) There is currently no valid patent issues with
Linux. So there is no
issues to be resolved either.
If MS has patented things so stupid like the double click
(http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/04/06/02/2222258.shtml?tid=109&tid=155&…)
I bet there are many things in Linux (and any other OS) that are covered by
MS Patents.
2) If such an issue should be discovered, Novell will
back up the Linux
side with their patent-portfolio, which (cough) *could* (cough) be an
expensive experience for the attacker.
Novell would back linux if they can get money from it, if the Singapore
administration doesnt buy linux from Novell I dont think they will get
involved.
3) Microsoft can't sue Singapore. They will have to get the US
government to do it for them, and then let WTO sort it out. And before
that they will have to force Singapore into thinking that SW-patents is
a neat idea. And then, although US might have the best government money
can buy, MS is still not the only kid in town with deep pockets.
Anyone can sue the Singapore's (or any country's) administration because
it's and organization with legal identity. But the laws used for the case
would be the laws from Singapore, and if they dont have laws supporting
software patents probably MS would lost, then MS may ask the US goverment to
do something about it (a new embargo maybe? i dont think so but software
patents will surely cause more troubles than solutions)
4) The end user is not responsible for what patent issues the producer
might get involved with.
Many companies thinks that it is, the SCO vs DaimlerCrysler case (because of
they use Linux) is an example, that case is because of copyright but surely
will be many like that because of patents.
Bests,
Pedro